Recently the board software has been updated and there are some known bugs/failures:
- Avatars are currently not being displayed✔ FIXED
- Tapatalk connection is currently broken✔ FIXED
- Avatars cannot be uploaded✔ FIXED

I'm not one for "Sunday best" in my mind a bike is to be ridden regardless of whether it is $500 or $10k+ and using top spec parts is all the better so long as they don't let you down. So I'm all with you on gatorskins on lightweights. In my mind the way I get most value out of my bikes is to ride them as much as possible, I tend to want to replace parts before they wear out anyway.

To clear up some confusion. Cervelo did not design this bike so that it could ONLY accept a zero setback seatpost.

What they did was lower the angle of the seatpost tube to allow many more riders the use of a lighter zero setback seatposts.

In my case, I ordered the frame something like 7 months ago. I wanted to get my parts ready so that when I received the frame I could build it up. I wanted an Ax Lightness seatpost and had to decide between the premium setback model or the no setback.

I knew that even with a 72 degree seatpost angle I would be close. It is simple geometry, on the smaller frames like a 51cm, the 72 degree seatpost angle moves the post back something like 1cm. I am out of town, when I get back I can actually measure the distance compared to the R5. On a larger frame the 72 degree angle moves the seatpost back further.

I am 5"7" and wear size 11 Mavic Huez shoes and have a somewhat normal if not a little on the long side femur. Nothing really out of the ordinary but I thought it would be close. I knew that if I bought the more expensive setback seatpost I would be riding soon after I got the frame. If I bought the no setback seatpost and it did not work I would be ordering a new seatpost and waiting.

You can check yourself, Fairwheel is currently out of stock on both premium (setback and no setback) 27.2 mm L1 seatposts. And guess how long you could be waiting for a seatpost from Ax Lightness. I am not going to put them down, they make great products. But even if you order something directly out of Germany, you might be waiting a while and sitting around looking at that new frame.

Once I have the saddle position dialed in I will be able to decide if I can use a no setback seatpost. There is a good chance that I will be able to use a no setback seatpost, but I think it will be close. If I can use a no setback I will be waiting for a while, Ax Lightness makes great products but getting them can often take some time. In the meantime I will be riding with my perfectly acceptable seatpost.

So the frameset alone weighs around 690gr for size 51? That's almost the same weight as the lightest one I have ever seen. (I scaled the the ruegamer zen uberlight and it weighed 688gr w/o hanger) I think this frame is quite an achievement for big brand frame. Is the fork steerer tapered?

I didnt realise when i first commented on this bike how much this total build would cost i mean i knew the ax-lightness kit and lightweights would make it expensive but i hadnt realised the cost of that frame. Truely Epic build on that note

I knew that even with a 72 degree seatpost angle I would be close. It is simple geometry, on the smaller frames like a 51cm, the 72 degree seatpost angle moves the post back something like 1cm. I am out of town, when I get back I can actually measure the distance compared to the R5. On a larger frame the 72 degree angle moves the seatpost back further.

Don't sweat the seatpost. But this isn't correct. The amount the seat is moved back depends on the saddle-to-BB distance, not the frame size. And if the seat tube axis intersects the BB axis, then the you'd expect this to scale with rider height, anyway, so there's no reason to believe a smaller frame is more likely to use a setback post than a larger one.

What I was trying to say was I found it difficult to precisely calculate exactly how much further back the seatpost on the R5ca would meet the saddle compared to my R5. On a 51cm frame I estimated that it would work out to around 1cm, that the seatpost would hit the saddle around 1cm further back than on the R5. I could look at my R5 and see where the seatpost was hitting the saddle and knew that I would need the seatpost to hit at least 1cm further back and even that would be close.

If you had a 58cm frame and your current setup only required a small setback, something like 1cm then you could feel comfortable ordering a no setback seatpost and be confident that it would work. Moving from a 73 degree angle to 72 would move you back say 1.5cm.

Not to knock Cervelo but they gave very few details about the R5ca geometry. It is hard to tell from the photo, but it almost looks like the seat tube starts out by going up from the BB and then transitions into a 72 degree angle.

I hope that by posting my experience that others will be able to benefit.

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum